L.A. Noire

[lobotomy42]

I'm not sure what everyone's complaining about. How is this different from, say, any adventure game? I resent hand-holdeyness, but I think there are certain genres and situations where it's appropriate. Adventure games are one such case. As an adventure game, I think this will hold up quite well.

I think the key is not to think of it as an action game or an open world game or an RPG, because it clearly isn't any of those things.

[Kolzig]

So what's this talk I hear about DLC before the game is even released? Granted it seems that this is only "a free DLC" for first day perch people.

I tell you, the worst disease in gaming in this generation has been DLC and I hope it dies quickly and as painfully as possible.

I'd like to play this on my PC someday, but as with RDR and Alan Wake, these games just are not for PC gamers and I got enough games coming this year anyway in addition to all the old unplayed games.

[Thompson]

I tell you, the worst disease in gaming in this generation has been DLC and I hope it dies quickly and as painfully as possible.

I disagree, please elaborate on this point.

[Kolzig]

Many cases at the moment seem to mean with DLC, a feature that was supposed to be in the actual game, but was cut out in order to cash in as DLC. Oh well, that's a business decision, although a quite lazy one.

The worst cases are when DLC is announced even before a game is released.

Then we have the hats, but I'm not touching that subject. People can buy all that useless stuff if they want to and also choose to not buy if they don't want to. This is all just useless internet raging...

[Nappi]

Many cases at the moment seem to mean with DLC, a feature that was supposed to be in the actual game, but was cut out in order to cash in as DLC. Oh well, that's a business decision, although a quite lazy one.

The worst cases are when DLC is announced even before a game is released.

Then we have the hats, but I'm not touching that subject. People can buy all that useless stuff if they want to and also choose to not buy if they don't want to. This is all just useless internet raging...

I used to look at DLC a bit like this but not anymore.

Even if the DLC was developed alongside the game itself and made available on launch day, it doesn't mean that if the culture of DLC didn't exist, that content would have made it in the base game. It wouldn't have been made at all. I'm sure L.A. Noire and most of the other games with day one DLC have more than enough content in the main game to justify the price-tag. The developer decides to use additional resources to make additional content for additional profit.

There is a beautiful example how DLC is not just cut out content from the main game in this very forum. Assassin's Creed II handled DLC amazingly badly, from DLC complainers point of view, with two chapters towards the end of the game "missing" and later made available as a paid DLC. If I remember correctly, Chris Remo played the PC version of the game which integrated the DLC seamlessly and had major complaints about how unnecessarily long and repetitive the ending of the game was. With the DLC included, two minor self-contained plot lines are introduced right before the finale that tie only very loosely to overall story. It would have been very strange decision to include these into the already quite lengthy main game.

[Thompson]

Even if the DLC was developed alongside the game itself and made available on launch day, it doesn't mean that if the culture of DLC didn't exist, that content would have made it in the base game. It wouldn't have been made at all. I'm sure L.A. Noire and most of the other games with day one DLC have more than enough content in the main game to justify the price-tag. The developer decides to use additional resources to make additional content for additional profit.

I see it pretty much the same way, DLC allows developers to produce more content than they would otherwise have been able to make.

Admittedly, the system is sometimes used pretty badly, unlocking content that is already on the disc for money seems pretty gross to me. Buying cosmetic items is fine to me, sure I don't like TF2 hats, but that doesn't mean I don't think they should be available; it's when they sell items that make an actual impact on multiplayer gameplay that I hate it.

Who can say that buying more of a game that you love is a bad thing? It's the same deal as an expansion pack, except downloadable. (Just don't abuse it.)

[toblix]

DLC is the The Return of Jafar of video games. And even if it isn't, my perception of it is so ruined by the worst examples that I've never bought any DLC, even for games I loved, like Enslaved. In my mind's eye, I see interns and managers' cousins being tasked with making a new castle or whatever, just so they can say they have DLC. I've probably missed some sweet gaming because of this.

[Nappi]

I've never bought any DLC, even for games I loved, like Enslaved.

Heh. I'm actually way more interested in Pigsy's Perfect 10 than the base game. Oh well..

[toblix]

Nooooooo

[Nappi]

It sounds amazing! I mean, you set out to build yourself a robotic friend. How cool is that!

I bet you'd enjoy it.

[Thompson]

Quick Look!

I've watched the first minute and already beautiful menu UI.

Edit: GAHHHH WANT GAME

Review.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Thompson

[ThunderPeel2001]

It sounds like a very flawed game, but I can't decide if I'm going to love it or not, regardless. I imagine it's something I could possible enjoy, despite the hand-holdyness. Maybe I'll see how Jake likes it.

[vimes]

d months. I'm the opposite of surprised by those reviews. And I'm excited. I like adventure games (even modern hand holdey ones when the stories are good) and I like police procedurals and I like noir and hard boiled crime fiction a

Emphasis mine; because for me that's what it will boil down to : if the writing and the structure are great, then I'm definitely in. The issue is that I really can't tell from the trailer... but I don't feel like spoiling myself any further either

I guess I'll buy it, then.

But I hope it's good since I could spend 6 hours watching genre movies (e.g still have to watch the Maltese Falcon and re-watch Double Indemnity) instead of a string pastiche, homage or bad mimic of the genre.

[twmac]

This game has been presented as "this is a modern police procedural/investigation-style adventure game with a Rockstar Games level of fit and finish" for months and months. I'm the opposite of surprised by those reviews. And I'm excited. I like adventure games (even modern hand holdey ones when the stories are good) and I like police procedurals and I like noir and hard boiled crime fiction and I like when people spend inordinate amounts of money on those things, so I will probably eat this game up. I have no expectations (or desires) for an open world, reactive, systemic experience with this game. I just want to wander through a lot of immaculately produced period LA crime fiction at my own pace, fucking around with the world and cast a bit along the way. Maybe that makes me horrible or whatever, but probably not.

That is a fair point. However, the manner of some of the reviews and how they address this shift in focus is abysmal. One of them actually read: 'Don't think of this as another GTA clone, think of it more as Mafia or The Godfather games' and failed to justify that comment.

Also, the people who do talk about the story have commented on the the characters being cliched and the short form stories not being very good (the overarching story line redeeming them somewhat).

I am not as in love with the period as I was with Western settings so I cannot reconcile dropping 60 dollars + tx on this game. I am also tired of Rockstar just whacking a shit ton of polish on wonky mechanics (Red Dead, GTA IV) and everyone losing it as to how Rock Star have done it again.

[Patters]

Urgh that animation makes me feel sick. It's got fidelity, but there is something sorely lacking that is making me feel quite nauseous. I guess I'm sitting this one out.

[CaptainFish]

The complaint that you can just walk over every square inch pressing x seems unfair to me. This isn't the 16-bit era anymore. Worlds have enough fidelity now that you can explore them like a sane person. If the argument is that you can find things without being prompted first, that's a matter of opinion. I can see how being able to find hidden things without some notion of it being there, could seem off. However, the argument that it's bad that you can find everything if you're thorough is kinda dumb.

They probably thought about implementing time limits or Indigo Prophecy style penalty interactions, and decided that those constructs were too contrived. Should the crime scenes have been unrealistically big? Should there have been mini games for finding evidence? It seems they chose a system that is, on one hand, easy to break, but more engrossing on the other.

[Squid Division]

Urgh that animation makes me feel sick. It's got fidelity, but there is something sorely lacking that is making me feel quite nauseous. I guess I'm sitting this one out.

The facial animations?

I forget where I read it (GiantBomb review?), but they're right that the life-like facial animations really, really contrasts with the kind of stiff body animation. For me, it's like looking into next gen and last gen at the same time.

[Nappi]

The superb facial animation and somewhat subpar graphics and especially lack of skin detail make for a strange combination. I can't really imagine it ruining the game for me. Still, very excited to play this.

[Forbin]

from the Giant Bomb quick look, this is my impression of LA Noire so far

+

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IijTBRkDtc#at=6s

[Sno]

Many cases at the moment seem to mean with DLC, a feature that was supposed to be in the actual game, but was cut out in order to cash in as DLC. Oh well, that's a business decision, although a quite lazy one.

The worst cases are when DLC is announced even before a game is released.

To go with the comments about Assassin's Creed 2 that some other people have been making, i remember reading some comments from that game's development team arguing that game's DLC is the content that would have never been ready for the retail release. It was the stuff they cut from the game, it was simply never going to be in the retail release, and in the past it would have never been seen by gamers. The argument was made that DLC is just the avenue through which they can go back and complete it and add it to the game in a way that makes business sense. In this way of looking at it, you're basically paying for an extended or director's cut of the game.

I don't know if i personally buy that argument, but it sounds like a fair justification, but in general i'm pretty pro DLC i guess. The thing is i still judge it on a fairly case by case basis. Every developer approaches it in such a wildly different fashion. It's a scheme that is abused in some pretty reprehensible ways, to be sure. (Particularly by japanese developers, i find.)

As for the facial animation in LA Noire, i think it looks incredible, but one of the things that has been bugging me about it is the necks. Everybody seems a little disjointed around their necks. (If you've seen behind the scenes footage, you know that all the actors' performances are face-scanned while sitting down and being quite motionless. All that is then stitched to obviously very active and mobile bodies, and it doesn't quite always match up perfectly. It's a little unnerving when you start noticing it.)

[Sno]

So i've been playing this game for a couple days, and...

You know, it's great that they've rendered this massive and accurate facsimile of 1940's LA, but it also seems like a ponderous misallocation of development resources. It's such a linear, focused experience, and having that open world does literally almost nothing to enhance the game. I feel like the game would actually be better if it wasn't there, they'd then have the kind of control over their heavily structured narrative experience that they need to maintain the tone and pace they're going for.

There's also a few issues with the facial animation, i find. There seems to be a fairly uniform distribution of triangles over the faces, instead of having a greater level of fidelity at the points of focus like the eyes and the nose and the lips. It creates a sensation that is not unlike viewing a blurry FMV game.

Jesus, and every time one of those characters reaches up to scratch their blurry FMV face with their jittery polygon hands, the game just dives straight into the uncanny valley. It's cool technology and everything, but i think this approach needs a few iterations before it will stand up to real scrutiny.

[lobotomy42]

You know, it's great that they've rendered this massive and accurate facsimile of 1940's LA, but it also seems like a ponderous misallocation of development resources. It's such a linear, focused experience, and having that open world does literally almost nothing to enhance the game. I feel like the game would actually be better if it wasn't there, they'd then have the kind of control over their heavily structured narrative experience that they need to maintain the tone and pace they're going for.

This. It's actually quite immersion-breaking. In the first tutorial mission, if you leave the investigation area, it suddenly becomes daytime and Phelphs turns off his flashlight. Then you walk back in, and it's dead night again. And it makes no sense that you can leave in the middle of an investigation, spend a few days driving around (and running over pedestrians, etc, like in GTA), return, and...there everyone is, still waiting for you.

[ThunderPeel2001]

This. It's actually quite immersion-breaking. In the first tutorial mission, if you leave the investigation area, it suddenly becomes daytime and Phelphs turns off his flashlight. Then you walk back in, and it's dead night again. And it makes no sense that you can leave in the middle of an investigation, spend a few days driving around (and running over pedestrians, etc, like in GTA), return, and...there everyone is, still waiting for you.

Oh, wow. This sounds like a misfire. I'll wait until it's a budget game, if at all.

[Jake]

Oh, wow. This sounds like a misfire. I'll wait until it's a budget game, if at all.

That specific complaint's not reason enough to not buy the game in my opinion. But, to each their own.

I'm only a little way into the Traffic cases so far but am enjoying it. I don't think this is a fun game to watch ("why is he just turning that gun to the left?)

The face capture tech is awesome except when its not. Sometimes it seems like their camera rigs failed to pick up a surface difference and then an ear sort of melds down into the shape of the side of the face and is just a texture instead of being modeled until they turn their head. Maybe its just the lighting, who knows. The body mocap acting is the most surprising, in that (like a lot of GTA games) its still bad. I guess nobody cares about body acting, compared to face acting, but the popping and stuff was weird to see in such a high profile game which is so focused on the people.

BUT I am liking the game a lot. The investigations are fun and the world is beautifully done. It's basically Phoenix Wright Noir, or the most expensive Telltale CSI game ever made, and with a far better setting than either of those, but that makes a huge difference.

Edited May 20, 2011 by Jake

[ThunderPeel2001]

That specific complaint's not reason enough to not buy the game in my opinion. But, to each their own.

Well it's more that complaint and the previous one... That the "sandbox" world is completely separate to the main game. It sort of reminds me of The Movies in that way, and it just feels like it may not be Rockstar's best. (Also note: I very rarely buy full price games, so it'd have to be Red Dead Redemption/GTAIV to make me consider buying it now, it's not a massive slight against a game if I don't buy full price! Also, the fact that I'm considering buying it at all is something for me.)